FIRST! and shearman is a shit firm!

not surprised

Fourth

Staffing corporate attorneys on litigation work suggests to me that they don't want to lay associates off if they can help it, especially when there's billable work to be had elsewhere in the firm in a litigation-heavy time. I'd rather keep my job and do doc review with the prospect of getting back on track a couple of years from now when the markets pick up than the alternative.

Shearman=TTT

I heard it was at least 5 at Loeb. Some in the Cali office as well.

All this reporting on jobs and bar results seems like a change of pace...did Lat put an end to the Obama lovin' MysTTTal ways of doing business? Lat = Change I can believe in.

FYI-Loeb canceled their 2009 SA program.

Don't most reviews of junior associates come from senior associates rather than partners?

OMG

Didn't S&S learn their lesson from the 2001 layoffs? They were just starting to recover from the reputation hit since 2L didn't pay attention to the legal market in 2001 (and so don't know about it).

This blew up in their face once the market picks up, and they deserve it again.

WHAT A TTT

Mystal: "Give me your lunch."
Lat: "No, get your own lunch."
Mystal: "I'm warning you. I eat a lot of lunch. Give me your lunch."
Lat: "No. I am gay."
Mystal: "Oh"

I hate Loeb & Loeb. I hope they crumble.

S&S is widely regarded as one of the worst v40 firms at my T5 school for reasons like this. They are the ultimate backup firm for a low-performing prestige whore.

Isn't Loeb and Loeb a deli?

Just goes to show - once a TTT, always a motherfucking TTT. Seriously, Shearman is one law firm that should be avoided by associates at ALL costs.

I like S&S. It was because of Mad Men that I decided to accept their offer.

Damn, that's a glaring example of not learning from prior mistakes.

Damn, that's a glaring example of not learning from prior mistakes.

*crosses fingers and hopes that the firings will result in more space for an eager (yet nervous) T-10 1L*

-nervous T-10 1L
email job leads to nervoust101l@yahoo.com

When I was interviewing for 2L positions back in the fall of 2004, S&S was widely regarded as being a shit firm. Not just because of their has-been status and mediocre standards, people, and clients/work--nobody had forgotten or forgiven their 2001 layoffs.

S&S to . . . Heller/Thelen status!

I thought Loeb & Loeb was a gay lobbying group for gays who want to lobby.

"They are the ultimate backup firm for a low-performing prestige whore."

So true.

16 - right on, playa...

I don't agree. SkaddenDC is the ultimate backup firm for a low-performing prestige whore who likes to do keg stands and throw up on the wives of partners at parties.

I think the caliber of people at SkaddenDC is much higher than at Shearman NY.

Are we looking at a Sherman & Sterling / Thelen merger situation here?

Loeb & Loeb? Aren't those the 2 d-bags who killed that kid in Chicago and left their specs at the scene?

A top notch law firm like WILDMAN HARROLD would never fire its associates...

I guess S&S has rejected all the morons who posted on this. I'd like to hear who the "tipster" is, probably another reject.

Gays need lobbyists too.

First time on this blog, last time on this blog. You are all pathetic losers. Get lives, immediately.

I remember when David Heleniak (the "Shearmanator") went from practice group to practice group in 2001 telling everyone that the layoffs, while necessary, would never ever happen again. Should have known that was bs when he high-tailed it to Morgan Stanley a year later. What is wrong with that firm?

wait...if S&S is still smarting from its mistake in 2001, why would it lather, rinse, repeat now? can't tell if the brain trust at the firm is still that fucking stupid (definitely possible) or mysTTTal can't express himself clearly.

either way, both fucking suck.

Gibson Dunn LA has been staffing corporate juniors on litigation for over a year. There are second year "corporate associates" who have done almost no corporate work. Pure doc review all day every day.

shit this economy sucks...nyu 2L here and my peers at columbia are taking all the jobs because their school is so much better. i was wondering if any HLS or SLS peers have an information crystal that would help me out???

If the S&S rumors are accurate, that is incredibly shortsighted on their part. Even though lots of firms are cutting folks, to couch economic layoffs as performance based is poor form. Couple that with the fact that Sherman had already harmed its reputation in the last round of industry wide layoffs, and I see no reason a top candidate would want any part of them when times pick back up. Of course, they could probably give a rip about associates based off their actions, so maybe it's no loss in their minds.

Loeb will always fail until it accepts as a partner Lisa Loeb:

and you say I only hear what I want to:
I don't listen hard,
I don't pay attention to the distance that you're running
or to anyone, anywhere,
I don't understand if you really care,
I'm only hearing negative: no, no, no.

Loeb & Loeb really screwed over those associates. One week's notice and a month's severance is almost punitive.

LOL to #38

38 -- Comment of the Day!

You say, I only hear what I want to...

Looks like CWT was right to bleed early.

Excellent use of a "Lord of the Rings" quote.

Hey 32,

I see you. You lied.

Welp, see you tomorrow!

-Me.

listen, wildman harrold is where fired associates go, douche.

stop tring to pump your bs ttt shithole.

Mystal: "Give me your lunch."
Lat: "No, get your own lunch."
Mystal: "I am warning you. I eat a lot of lunch. Give me your lunch."
Lat: "No. I am gay."
Mystal: "Oh. What about tomorrow?"
Lat: "Gay then too."
Mystal: "Oh."

CLS 2L here,. S & S just jarvis probed so many of my peers who accepted offers thurr.

which offices?

32 is a liar from S & S. Maybe if they didn't have people like him they wouldn't be forced to get rid of people.

what does it mean to be "jarvis probed"?

Steals hamburgers from Elie....robble robble robble!

-H.B. Urgeler

lots of my friends at CLS are freaking out about jobs

performance-related layoffs? poor form, shearman, poor form. you could've at least saved yourself some institutional respect if you were honest about the layoffs, but no.

haven't firms learned by now that covering up layoffs actually gives them a worse rep than if they just fessed up to economic problems?

test

This is really unfortunate for the associates, but similar things are going on pretty much everywhere. The entire year has been slow for corporate and extremely slow for capital markets. In October, it became crystal clear to everyone that 2009 would actually be even worse. Firms will float dead weight for one year but not two.

That said, framing the layoffs as performance related pruning is poor form.

what's with all the hatin' on skadden? Are they just jealous?

Why is Elie ignoring the layoffs at SkaddenDC? Do they give him extra sandwiches?

dear friends who anonymously frequent this site and engage in productive dialogue during our wretchedly boring classes or doc review: a jarvis probe is anything that startles the ostriches; see the ground breaking documentary "go god go" and its equally revolutionary sequel:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/index.php?season=10

further, a blueberry fart is a very unique occurrence that roommates inhabiting NYU law dorms emit after consuming a healthy breakfast of total raisin (yes we do like those raisin girls) brand sprinkled with blueberries.

an information crystal is something my peers at columbia have and i need. if you have any information on the whereabouts of said special object, please inform.

37 - you dolt. top candidates never consider offers at S&S. if they did, then they're not top candidates to begin with. HTH.

Shearman and Sterling, where Tulane, Hofstra, and Texas grads go to die.

Who's the d-bag at 54 trying to test whether or not the comment system functions properly?

Epic misquotation FAIL.

Per IMDB the quote is: "It has forsaken these lands."

MysTTTal.

Holy $#l+, twice in one decade?

You'd have to be a moron with no other options to go to S&S after this. Job security = 0. The place is a total sweatshop anyway, and the idea of going somewhere where they'll work you to death for years, making millions on your blood, and then fire you the instant it slows...

Well, I guess if you're a total schlub, it's better than unemployment. Maybe.

What are the sandwiches like at SkaddenDC?

F U, Jarvis Probes.

- CLS 2L

It doesn't sound to me like S&S is really firing people. The rumor about cutting back on stellar reviews is making its rounds at each and every law firm in America.

The thing about mid-to-senior level people being let go, while somewhat disconcerting, also just reflects the reality that the firm can't afford to keep those kinds of people around ever, and if conditions were better, they'd amicably go elsewhere.

As for transferring slow junior people to busy departments, that seems kind of S&S more than anything.

Not much of a story.

Not all corp departments have been slow for a year; and not all are slow now.

They would never let Don Draper go. That is blasphemy.

Things can't be all that bad, at least they are still holding their holiday party.

http://abovethelaw.com/2008/11/shearman_sterling_holiday_party.php

Wow 66, are you from S&S recruiting?

S&S are just adding a little perfume to the pig in doing this, trying to make themselves more attractive in their ongoing merger talks with Allen & Overy.

66, don't you have some S&S recruiting event to plan?

Loeb had some shitty windowless offices for junior attorneys. Screw THAT.

Allen's Ovaries are gross. I thought Prop 8 took care of that.

Ha! Nice call, 3:52.

sooo.....nothing has happened yet except a bunch of law students making repetitive comments about unsubstantiated speculation at a firm they have no connections to whatsoever? now that's what I call informative! where can I sign up for an RSS feed?

Can any S&S associates provide actual details?

@77: Yes. Current associate. People fired, including litigation.

71: by "pig," do you mean Sarah Palin?

looks like 3:38 PM (1) needs a hug

Work is extremely slow in all corporate departments. There will be MASS layoffs at all V10-V100 firms in January. I'm talking back to 1995 levels, just like the DOW.

so glad i rejected my offer. Really- all of the shearman defenders just stop. its obvious that you are either in recruiting or plain delusional about losing your job at the firm. The damage has already been done. No point in lying on here. Shearman is constantly featured and for all of the wrong reasons. Had the firm not lost all of the credibility it had with the last round of layoffs, it may have been able to make enough hay during the boom to stay afloat. Sadly it didn't and the most we can hope for is that those who are affected land on their feet. People with offers- don't go unless its all you have. For those who have accepted- best of luck.

MysTTTal, why can you not do anything correctly the first time? Why can't you write at a basic high school level? Why must others constantly correct your lazy, inconsiderate ass?

You aren't dumb (though you aren't especially intelligent), you're something far worse: sloppy.

Sidley LA stealth layoff of 2-3 associates. Check it out.

2 or 3 associates is probably just normal course of business. SIdley LA might be hurting, i dont know, but that does not qualify as stealth layoffs, come on

Loeb offers below market pay, below market bonus, below market severance, the joy of windowless interior offices well past your mid-level years ... wait, but I've heard they have the same a**hole partners as the other firms so at least you'll have that in common with the rest of your peers. Obviously avoid this firm like the plague - unless you have no other option.

66 and 76 - it is not just that you are complete D-bags, but you are complete morons - SS is sinking faster than Mystal's writing skills. Why don't you go edit SS's wikipedia entry now and proclaim it as the greatest law firm ever? Fucking morons.

The sandwiches at SkaddenDC are pretty damn good. But the cookies are to die for.

Worst tasting treat? Stealth layoffs.

67,

A lot depends on a firm's clients and/or practice. Any firm that does a lot of capital markets or private equity work (which includes a lot of VERY good firmd) is going to be pretty slow . There were very few IPOs or high yield offerings this year, and close to zero in the 4th quarter. LBO activity has fallen off a cliff. Private equity firms are still doing some transactions, but leverage is a huge part of thier business model and that financing just isn't available right now.

Why S&S, why? I want to take my offer, because there really are some good people there, but when you go and do things like this you lose all credibility!

Agree with 66, a lot of people on here need a reality check and need to become more aware of the business side of a law firm. Stop living in a bubble.

Slow day, huh, Lat? This 'story' is a joke. Few, if any, corporate associates are working on litigation matters right now. But if any are, does that not suggest that the firm is allocating resources where they can best be used right now? Shearman just represented Merrill in a 50 billion dollar merger that has kept multiple departments incredibly busy. Can your firms' M&A practices say the same thing? I think the "tipster" is someone that is concerned about his / her job because he's been spending too much time hanging out at the Shearman coffee bar. Get a real story, Lat. There are no layoffs at Shearman.

Slow day, huh, Lat? This 'story' is a joke. Few, if any, corporate associates are working on litigation matters right now. But if any are, does that not suggest that the firm is allocating resources where they can best be used right now? Shearman just represented Merrill in a 50 billion dollar merger that has kept multiple departments incredibly busy. Can your firms' M&A practices say the same thing? I think the "tipster" is someone that is concerned about his / her job because he's been spending too much time hanging out at the Shearman coffee bar. Get a real story, Lat. There are no layoffs at Shearman.

bingham...closing walnut crack?? losing more partners?

Slow day, huh, Lat? This 'story' is a joke. Few, if any, corporate associates are working on litigation matters right now. But if any are, does that not suggest that the firm is allocating resources where they can best be used right now? Shearman just represented Merrill in a 50 billion dollar merger that has kept multiple departments incredibly busy. Can your firms' M&A practices say the same thing? I think the "tipster" is someone that is concerned about his / her job because he's been spending too much time hanging out at the Shearman coffee bar. Get a real story, Lat. There are no layoffs at Shearman.

#92 - If you worked at a real law firm, you would not get that excited over one deal. Top firms do such deals all the time, not just once in a decade.

Three different Shearman recruiters?

Whatever, I told you guys 4 months ago that they had started laying off associates. Why did it take you sooo long to realize that it was true?

People being fired for incompetence is not a layoff.

This is not news. EVERY FUCKING FIRM is laying people off left and right.

Most posters here are still in denial. This is not the 2001 recession -- things will not "pick up" soon. Corporate will be slow for the next DECADE, and the firms will need to adjust by cutting their associate numbers by 40-70%.

99, does that mean that clients can demand refunds for hours billed by those incompetent souls?

100 - You're right that today is not a repeat of 2001 and most firms are trimming. But you're a moron if you think that corporate will be slow for the next 10 years and that that firms need to cut associate ranks by 40-70%.

Loeb has been bleeding associates for a while and some of those have been stealth layoffs. Loeb has always been notoriously cheap on severance and will not extend medical and/or provide any outplacement assistance. How freaking much does it cost to pay for someone to help with resume preparation, etc. anyway? These terminations are too early to be performance based as Loeb typically does not even complete its performance reviews until December. I heard that the memo that came down to the corporate group in New York identified several people by name and then said that there would be other terminations in litigation, or, we are laying off people in litigation too but have not yet figured out who they are.

Instead of relying on nameless "tipsters" perhaps people here could look at facts such as the Thomson Reuters League Tables for legal advisors for debt and equity. There Shearman leads many of the rankings and places in the top 15 for nearly all of them. How does one then come to the conclusion that Shearman is slow in capital markets or at least slower than anyone else? As an aside, you will see similar Shearman rankings in the M and A tables.

Check out the chart here: "10 Firms That Shrank the Most"

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202425894490

Sherman is right there with the rest of the TTTs.

Loeb did not even give one week of notice. The people who were being laid off were told on Wednesday that their last day would be Friday. The severance in all cases was measured in weeks, as in one month or less, with no extended medical other than COBRA and no outplacement services. A new low in terms of what a firm is willing to do for those who it has to let go due to economic conditions.

102 - Agreed. Economists across the board predict the recession will end in 2009, whether its midway or year-end is questionable. Projections are of unemployment from 7 - 9% in the US (best and worst case scenarios). If you can hold your head above water until 2010 the credit markets will have thawed and there will be lots of new opportunities/new regulations.

Not to make this political but all the Obama hating republicans on this blog should be happy, a new age of regulation wil be ushered in and Obama will stamp the "Lawyer Employment Act"

Naysayers are fools, yes there will be short term pain but the world will go on (and hopefully leave you behind since you have the business acumen of a turtle)

Gimme a break, Loeb thinks they can explain this away by saying they have recently hired lateral partners. Those partners have business in other areas such as IP and not in corporate and litigation which is where these layoffs took place. A piece of sh*t firm who will not fess up and say business is slow and we have to let people go. Not only do they claim that economic layoffs are performance based but they are as miserly as possible on severance. Even people who are getting canned for performance can expect to get more than one month of severance.

105: For what it's worth, most of the reason Shearman lost headcount is because they parted ways with their 30-lawyer Mannheim office.

"Not to make this political but all the Obama hating republicans on this blog should be happy, a new age of regulation wil be ushered in and Obama will stamp the 'Lawyer Employment Act.'"

As much as I hate Obama and all that for which he stands, TITCR.

107 -- You (and the economists you cite) are being way too optimistic.

What will be the engine that drives this so called growth in late 2009? News flash: there is no new source of growth -- only de-leveraging.

107 and 110 are correct: the coming new financial regulations will create a a boom akin to that following the '33 and '34 Acts--for some firms.

Others will fucking starve.

105

Look at the list of the 'growing firms' next to the 'shrinking firm' - Locke Lord is #2. If the ATL rumors are true, that means that 'growth' (and maybe even shrinkage) doesn't tell us much.

much ado about nothing.

Any info on what the severance package was like for Shearman associates let go would be appreciated.

111, news flash: learn to read/interpret because 107 said (wrote) nothing about growth in 2009. and read up on some basic econ. cap markets can deleverage and stay idle only so long, and the markets pick up months before the real economy. people are just waiting to see how cheap everything will be.

Loeb's response provides further evidence of its low-class, TTT status. It takes a really shitty firm to blame its inability to bring in work on associates whose only crime was the fact that they worked at such a crappy firm. As 103 mentioned, Loeb hasn't even conducted performance reviews for the year.

Wow, 104. If S&S is doing so great and they have no hesitation laying off a bunch associates (assuming that is true) in a terrible economy , then I think that reflects a different problem with S&S. This is the second time around in recent history, and law students who are considering firms should take notice of which firms don't even try to keep associates when things get rough. If they really can't keep their associates busy, then that is one thing (even though characterizing all the layoffs as performance related, when that is probably not the whole story, is completely cowardly), but if things are great as 104 says, then I think that says even worse things about S&S.

And, no, not all firms have started laying off people -- and some of us are staying busy even in this market. Some firms recognize that things are slowing down, but are planning for the long term (holding on to associates). Maybe that is overly optimistic, but I haven't seen mass layoffs happening at most large firms yet (and hopefully they won't).

This S&S rumor is ridiculous. It doesn't even on its face allege anything problematic.

So, some associates have been "asked to leave." How is that any different from normal? No allegation is made that associates are being fired on the spot or told to clean out their offices by the end of the week. As far as we can tell from this "rumor," this is just the normal behind-the-scenes culling process that happens at every firm no matter what the economic climate (where the associate is given a generous amount of time to find another job, and never has to admit he was told to leave).

On the "stricter review" part of the rumor: I have no doubt that S&S is setting the performance bar higher today given the economic situation than they otherwise would, but, really, is there any firm that isn't?

You Shearman-haters come off as awfully silly when you proclaim lame, facially innocuous rumors like this to be irrefutable proof of S&S's crappiness.

There is no way some of the posters here can be lawyers, given the profound lack of reading/analytical skills demonstrated.

The only concrete thing that the article says are 1) some Capital Markets associates are being given litigation work (same thing happening in my V30 firm), and 2) partners were told to be more stringent in their reviews (I have no idea how the tipster could know this unless he is a partner -- and if so, what a messed up partner).

How are people reading from that that people have been laid off?

Milbank = stealth layoff capital of NYC.

119, it's a bullshit rumor. Some associates fear that this is a possibility because it's review time. It's always review time at this time of the year, and it has nothing to do with the economy. Litigation has been busy all year and Capital Markets has slowed. Is this a surprise? Litigation is supposed to help offset a stumbling economy for corporate law firms -- a lesson Shearman is starting to get (although it can probably do even more). Bottom line at S&S is that there have been no layoffs, and as far as I can tell, there won't be. If some associates have to help out in other busier areas until their department picks up, isn't that far better than laying them off? I, for one, hope that if my department ever slows, my firm will offer me the opportunity to continue staying busy.

And Lat -- shame on you for spreading this garbage.

120 -- Care to expand on that?

On a broader note, it is despicable how a bunch of supposedly well-educated people can, without fair judgment, bash a firm and the people in it on the basis of such vague and nebulous information.

If associates were in fact being secretly laid off, it'd be different. But until then, grown the #$@# up people and stop acting like children (or xoxoth.com posters).

On a broader note, it is despicable how a bunch of supposedly well-educated people can, without fair judgment, bash a firm and the people in it on the basis of such vague and nebulous information.

If associates were in fact being secretly laid off, it'd be different. But until then, grown the #$@# up people and stop acting like children (or xoxoth.com posters).

"We know that Capital Markets practice groups are slow all over. But staffing corporate attorneys on litigation work suggests that there are larger problems with Shearman's corporate practices."

Does the fat blogger here have any clue how law firms work, or does he just say dumb shit like that to lawyers and think that people will be impressed if he says it with enough authority?

Loeb is a classic example of a firm trying desperately to keep up with the big boys by opening offices in NY and Chicago. They overextended themselves and will now pay the penalty. Let's see how well their expansion into the Asian markets turns out. They may be the next CA firm to bite it.

I am surprised not to hear more about the layoff that have been taking place at Proskauer...

What about the stealth layoffs taking place at Proskauer?

122 - you're an idiot. why don't you take another look at who wrote this piece.

130 - It's Lat's blog. The only idiots are the ones that believe this stuff on a slow news day.

120 - agreed - "no layoff promise"??!! oh please - such spin. Milbank is the stealth layoff capital of the legal world. lots of good young lawyers thrown out on the street recently

S&S started laying the ground work for this awhile ago. while this may not be surprising given the poor economic times, shearman's whole way of doing things is backwards and cowardly. they can't keep their associates busy and so the associates get let go because of their "performance??!?!" maybe they should try to mirror the successful law firms, that manage to keep their associates busy and if they can't, don't blame the associates for the partners' problems. this is coming from someone who just left shearman after being there for 5 years...

S&S started laying the ground work for this awhile ago. while this may not be surprising given the poor economic times, shearman's whole way of doing things is backwards and cowardly. they can't keep their associates busy and so the associates get let go because of their "performance??!?!" maybe they should try to mirror the successful law firms, that manage to keep their associates busy and if they can't, don't blame the associates for the partners' problems. this is coming from someone who just left shearman after being there for 5 years...

S&S started laying the ground work for this awhile ago. while this may not be surprising given the poor economic times, shearman's whole way of doing things is backwards and cowardly. they can't keep their associates busy and so the associates get let go because of their "performance??!?!" maybe they should try to mirror the successful law firms, that manage to keep their associates busy and if they can't, don't blame the associates for the partners' problems. this is coming from someone who just left shearman after being there for 5 years...

127 is an idiot. Loeb opened in NY in 1986! As for China, they have one of the top inbound (middle market) Chinese IPO practices in the country. Chicago office is making money and the firm is debt free. So like every other firm they layed off some loser associates. This is the new reality. All of these ignorant posters need to check their facts before spreading their idiocy!

White & Case in Manhattan just laid of 90 associates and 100 support today.

White & Case in Manhattan just laid off 90 associates and 100 support today.

Hey 136 - when did Loeb begin allowing its loser non-equity partners out of their cages long enough to post here - ?! "one of the top ibound (middle market) Chinese IPO practices in the country" ... ??? Sounds a lot like what people say about the Hoff being huge in Germany.

The story is true - I lived it. We went from very busy to very slow (60 hour average weeks to 10 hour weeks if that), and I went from a great review to being a horrible associate in one review period. As a general matter, they will not give people a date certain to leave, but they will stop giving them work. In some ways, this is the most demoralizing thing as you have to show up to a place that is lying to your face and hide in plain sight. This has and is happening to people that I considered to be brilliant so quality of work is really not the key determinate to who survives. The key factors are the relationships one has with certain partners (those with work and clout) and work one has with certain clients (those that still exist). Having lived it, I think that it is a mixed bag. On one side, I do not like being lied to. On the other, I appreciate having time to find a new position and leave, which I have. S&S has lost two large clients in Freddie Mac and Merrill as well as suffering through the downturn in other deal flow (I worked on the transactional side) so the stealth layoffs are not that surprising. Although, the holier-than-thou you suck party line does not sit well.

S&S truly sucks. It is a firm where the lawyers have decided to let fools with MBAs run the place. They spend enormous amounts of money on the most stupid projects that create zero revenue. The handful of idiots in charge - all seem to chant the same 'party line' like robots - are so threatened by anyone with a brain that they end up losing talent. They have zero appreciation for anyone, it is all about spreadsheets and numbers. This is why the place sucks and why anyone worth anything leaves. It is a miserable place, and the longer you are there the more you realize how ingrained the disfunction is and how futile attempts to change it are. Anyone taking the side of S&S in this discussion is working there now. Consider this place as a last resort.

As one of the sources for this story and currently at S&S, I have been astounded and saddened with the great response that the information received from current and ex-Shearmanites. I am glad that what is going on is now out in the open. I really wanted to expose this information for people like poster #140, who are being deliberately left with zero billable hours and misrepresented as having "performance" issues at review time when in fact they were not given sufficient opportunity to perform in the first place. I believe this is unethical on the firm's part and the fact that it is going on reflects serious shortcomings in the firm culture.

In response to poster 141, I believe that good management is clearly not just about spreadsheets and utiliization maximization. But in my opinion what has occurred at S&S has two primary causes: (1) fundamental problems with the firm culture, including a lack of sensitivity to associate development issues (and on this score it is interesting to note that the "Associate Development Committee" is composed entirely of partners and does not include associates and recent goings on involving the North American Associate Committee and this Committee), and (2) shortcomings in management. There are basically two ways to win in the law firm business, as in any business: (a) to compete on cost, and (b) to compete on differentiation. Successful large New York firms compete on the basis of (b). A partner at another New York firm once told me that the key to their success was paying great attention to (i) the clients they let in the door and keep, and (ii) the employees they let in the door and retain. S&S pays great attention to (i), but fails to cultivate a work culture and day-to-day working environment that facilitates attracting and retaining the best associates and ultimately partners (for partners, believe it or not, like to work in an environment where they get along with subordinates). The way that reviews are being conducted is reflective of underlying problems. I wish the best of luck to all current S&S associates who are in the position of #140 and who go to work and brave it out at a time when voting with their feet is not an option.

Dragonfire

All of you haters and posers talking about S&S are clearly the ones in fear for your jobs - have you got nothing better to do than post all this crap?? It's my first time here, and I'm appalled at your viciousness. As someone suggested above, you must have been rejected by S&S, otherwise why would you be so bitter? Also, you are a poor representative of how a professional attorney should behave. Grow up, or better yet, leave the profession. No one wants to work with you.

It's happening. Litigation, D.C. office. Ridiculously talented people being asked to leave.

Don't we all know that Loeb is TTT?

insider from S&S: astonishing performance review results are delivered by various partners in S&S. Some mid-senior associates are reviewed to be "technically incompetent" after 5-7 years' training in S&S ..................................

insider from S&S: astonishing performance review results are delivered by various partners in S&S. Some mid-senior associates are reviewed to be "technically incompetent" after 5-7 years' training in S&S ..................................